Talk:Close to Me (Season 13)/@comment-3575890-20140322224342
I'm sorry to drag this on further, but I feel this at the very least needs to be said: I don't understand why so many people attach negative connotations to debates like it's akin to clawing at throats. It's not. It seems a healthy debate can never occur on this board without someone interpreting it to mean a fight has broken out. Debating is not fighting. The very moment it devolves into fighting, it's not debating anymore, period. It's antagonizing, flame-baiting, and instigating, and THEN it's a problem and should be dealt with accordingly, but otherwise, there is nothing wrong with a good, healthy, civilized debate. Why should we all be so inclined as to limit ourselves to navigating only the threads of the characters and ships we like, replying only to posts we consign with, and avoiding reading/replying to any opinions/inputs that don't coincide with our own? I'm sorry, but that is ridiculously restrictive and discouraging of diversity, critical thinking, and independent thought. If I'm going to be honest, overall, this attitude that debates are pointless and should be avoided is really sucking the enjoyment out of this board for me. Not to single Dami out, because that's not my intent, but regarding his assertion that Zaya fans should be able to vocalize their dislike without Matlingsworth fans coming at them and vice versa; depending on what you'd define "coming at" as, I may or may not agree. If your contention here is that Matlingsworth/Zaya fans should be able to vocalize their opinions without being berated, patronized, insulted, then absolutely, I wholeheartedly concur. But if this is simply ruling that Matlingsworth/Zaya fans should just ignore each other's posts all together, then no. Sorry. I'm not for that. How about this instead? People should be able to respond to posts they do not consign with with cordial rebuttals and initiate civilized debates without that being blown out of proportion. Without that being misconstrued as a personal attack, intent to incite drama, or an invitation for an uncivilized flame-baiting war. The fact is, with most other messageboards, healthy, civilized debates are widely encouraged and a thing of the norm. People should simply be able to so much as freely counter a post they don't agree with without that being interpreted as a personal attack, without someone becoming offended, or someone simply interpreting the back and forth debating as fighting. I swear, everytime a simple debate so much as arises, no matter how civilized and controlled it is, it always turns into this big show of people complaining about all of the drama and fighting. In summation, all I'm saying here is that there is no need to assume WWIII has broken out everytime two parties do not see eye to eye on a particular matter and thus proceed to defend their stance and counter the others'. Debating is not fighting. So if someone rebuts your post, don't take it personally. If someone posts a comment in one of the threads you track that you don't agree with, don't think you're expected to keep your mouth shut; if you want to counter it, go right ahead. If the opposing side frequently posts their input in your thread, don't just assume your civilized input is discouraged in their thread. Should you be inclined to vocalize your input in the opposite thread, don't assume you're being silenced if someone from the opposite camp replies with a rebuttal. Don't assume you're being driven out with torches and pitchforks. It's a two-way street. BE CIVIL TO EACH OTHER AT ALL TIMES AND THERE SHOULDN'T BE PROBLEMS.